tv Your World With Neil Cavuto FOX News January 16, 2013 1:00pm-2:00pm PST
dog food. it shows the dog grabbed the food in the mouth before taking off. the store owner that the pooch had struck before. this all happened in new zealand. off to the pound for the dog but some locals have made offers to adopt the three legged bandit. >> and then there is this. philadelphia police say they arrested a guy who posed as a fire investigator to steal electronic equipment. christopher walked into a music school and historic landmark and said he needed to inspect the place and walked away with several thousands worth of equipment. he used his own name. he signed his name on one of the visitor's logs. after that, investigators had a pretty easy job of tracking him down. i'm trace gallagher. that is it for studio "b."
bill hemmer is at 7:00 in the east, 4:00 in the west. the dow, down about 30. your world with neil cavuto starts right now. >> neil:, gunning for guns as republicans saying, crashing the constitution. republicans, delirious. over president is they say is out of control. after signing no fewer 23 executive orders, he says will help curb gun violence. they say make a mockery of constitution. things like requiring federal agencies to provide all relevant data to a beefed up background system. improving incentives for states to share that data for that background system and expanding the affordable care act to
include allowing doctors to ask their patients, do you have guns in your home? no wonder, constitutional lawyer mark levine is hitting the roof. mark, this has got to be a record in a single day? >> this many executive orders? >> they are just starting. let's do any of these 23 has to do with newtown. they have nothing to do with the mass murder that took place in connecticut, zero. president won't be asked about it. i have gone through these. it's a weird collection of proposals. first of all we have obama ordering himself to order certain members of his administration to do things they should have been doing anyway. making sure they are trained and everything. why does the president have to issue an executive order. that is number one. there is a lot of talk about training and educating including first responders and local
enforcement. does the president know that the s.w.a.t. teams and first responders are best qualified, most experienced and trained up of anybody to handle situations like this? here is the problem. there are certain things in his executive orders that are unamerican. in some ways they are fascist. doctors are private citizens. do we really want doctors reporting to the federal government if they think somebody might have violent tendencies? do we want to discourage people that have mental health issues to see their doctor because they may be part of a national law enforcement database? how is that going to prevent any crime? you know a tiny fraction of murders occur from mentally ill people. there is no connection between reality and the president is proposing, whether it's newtown, violence on the street. what we need is criminal control. it's not a problem with mentally ill people or people that
legally have arms, it's not a problem with a whole bunch of people, but this thing seems to address. here is the bigger problem. not only does he use the obamacare law to force doctors to report on their patients -- by the way, here is a question. let's say a doctor doesn't report on a patient because he doesn't think the patient is dangerous. that patient goes out and kills somebody. the family. person that was killed, that doctor a legal obligation under obama's legislation to reported it and -- says, i didn't know. that doctor is going to be caught up in litigation forever whether he failed to report or should have report. i can give you a thousand examples like that. these are private citizens dealing deputyized by the federal government to report violations to the federal government? i'm sure all the left wing democrats will go nuts over
that. >> neil: let me ask you about the affordable care act or liberal interpretation many have argued that it is unconstitutional. the idea of weeding out or trying to telegraph a nut job, what is wrong with a system, trying to develop a system to spot them before they act? >> it's like grinding up ten million people to find ten criminals. what obama didn't talk about what he is going to do about gang violence, what he is going to do about drug violence, the high murder rate in chicago and detroit -- none of this will any impact. >> neil: do executive actions like this hold up? when franklin roosevelt, passed the supreme court, they said you went too far. how long does it take and what is the process? we have two dozen executive
actions taken today. how many and how long get undone? >> roosevelt proposed legislation and his own democratic house and his own vice president, former speaker of the house -- obama doesn't believe in legislation. i believe it's unconstitutional. the attempt to compel private citizens to report on private citizens under the guise it my save a child. we could deputize anybody on that. >> neil: maybe by blitzing this out today, he made it more difficult for guys like you to pick him apart. he may say, well, the majority nd i'm going to win.g to get >> i would say half of these absolute crap, just p.r. junk that he put together with his cabinet -- i'm ordering on you to do a report.
why doesn't he do it? those aren't the ones that bother me. i'll give you another example. he'll issue a presidential memorandum to research the causes and prevention of gun violence. that is an illegal executive order. cdc is forbidden by federal law to under talk studies like that for two reasons. the attempt through the backdoor to treat gun ownership and second amendment as a health issue so they spit out these gin up these phony reports, congress said you can't do that. number two, about 80% of the professors work for public colleges that are subsidized by state and federal government. if they wanted to do reports, they can do reports and there are hundreds of reports like this including by segregate john lot and they demonstrate the brady act hasn't done a damn thing to reduce crime in this country.
>> neil: the idea of doing it is as much for the p.r. to say, look, i'm the president of united states, i'm taking executive action to do something about it. look at congress, don't the don't do squat? >> think i that is true. but couple things poison pills, to have doctors reporting their clients to the federal government, this is 1930 stuff. the american people to rise up against that. medical profession needs to say no. he clearly wants a national database where all innocent citizens are in a database. can i ask you a question -- what does that do? i can understand a national database of criminals. what is that for. >> neil: whatever database it is i'm sure you are on it. [ laughter ]
>> neil: you enact it, we won't enforce it. that is message coming from a sheriff out in oregon. in a letter to vice president, i quote, any federal regulation enacted by congress or executive order offending the constitutional rights of my citizens will not be enforced by me or my deputies. can the sheriff do this legally? what about gun owners who take his advice? an attorney says the sheriff can do this but another attorney says no he cannot. rachel, you think he can, why? >> he absolutely can because the president can't tell state law enforcement officials what to do. the state law enforcement official is totally within his right, these are your laws. you enforce them. federal authority is who should be enforcing the federal law. guns are regulated by federal law. the sheriff is doing anything wrong by saying that he will not
enforce federal law. we see it all the time. in colorado the law is in conflict with state and federal with marijuana. the state officials do not go out and arrest people under the federal law. bottom line what he is doing is not wrong. >> first let me start off, me or you or the sheriffs to decide whether or not these proposed laws are constitutional. that is left for the court system. i certainly believe the sheriff has great intentions but at the end of the day, it's not law enforcement officer's duty to determine constitutionality of laws. i agree to a certain extent with your other guests. the feds are not going to require these states to enforce the laws. the onus is going to be on the federal government and f.b.i. and they will enforce the laws if they are enacted. we have to remember, federal law is the law of the land, bottom
line. >> neil: but the law of the land isn't very clear and this sheriff in this particular case, rachel is saying, i don't think that is the law of the land. i think that is breaking the constitution, is that fair game? >> yes, it absolutely is. at this point you have these officials who all take oaths that say i agree i'm going uphold the law of united states. what this sheriff had to do with high capacity magazines and banning types of weapons. at this point that would be unconstitutional for an executive order to come out. none of these 23 executive orders.... >> neil: it strikes you unfair. >> absolutely. >> neil: so executive orders, they can't be dismissed. what do you think of that because the president just issued close to two dozen of
them today? >> i agree executive orders are fine. i don't believe obama is going to issue an executive order banning assault rifles. >> i agree but what message are we sending to society when we are basically saying we're going to leave it up to the law enforcement officers to decide what laws they want to enforce, what laws are constitutional, what laws are not constitutional we would be living in a state of chaos. >> neil: they just change rules mid game. what this sheriff might be saying, look, i knew the law and i knew the constitution before the president and white house started changing the rules midstream. isn't that what he is saying? >> that is not what he is doing. >> what he is doing he is saying look, these are federal laws it's your job to enforce them.
this happens every single day in every single state. >> neil: the sheriff doing what he is doing, you don't think he is not. you would sue the sheriff but rachel, you would not? >> i would not. i think it's up to the federal government to decide how they want to deal with this sheriff or any other law enforcement officers believe state law trumps federal law. it's up to law enforcement officers to make it clearly best left to our court system and ultimately the supreme court. >> they aren't going to take your gun away. it's going to be the atf or f.b.i. they should be bothering to come to your door and take your gun away. if it ultimately comes becomes law, these are executive orders that then, yes, you can get in
trouble for violating the law. >> neil:. >> ladies, i wanted to thank you both. the president were using props for a speech as kids. if you are going to use props for a very different speech. we show it, you decide. sometimes life can be well, a little uncomfortable. but when it's hard or hurts to go to the bathroom, there's dulcolax stool softener. dulcolax stool softener doesn't make you go, it just makes it easier to go. dulcolax stool softener. make yourself comfortable.
>>. >> neil: did you notice this today? the president flanked by kids as he signed those 23 executive orders. but the kids are being threatened by another thing, the nation's soaring debt and $52,000 each american will be saddled with including these kids. when they are adults the number will be significantly higher. charms wants to know where the executive order to combat that crisis is.
charles is always annoyed. >> i am always annoyed. listen, i just don't like the idea of bringing kids out for this stuff to begin with. if we are looking for the best interests of our children and at the same time running up these debts that will certainly make their lives much more difficult, there is a lot of hypocrisy built into that. >> neil: let's leave aside the gun debate -- wouldn't you want to talk about kids and what they will be saddled with on the right or left unless we get the spending under control? you could say republicans wouldn't give in on defense, these kids are going to be screwed or whatever. but to use them to your advantage, to make the point unless we get the spending under control, these kids will be left with the bill. >> the president is very talented. i'd love to spend money, but it's the republicans' fault and i got the kids up here to prove
it. that is a little bit of stretch. >> neil: you do it like the village of the damned sort of thing, they slowly and sadly accept their fate? >> all of those kids on stage, by the time they are 65 they will owe about a million dollars at the right. forget about $52,000. one million dollars in the text ten years, we'll spend $4 trillion in bondholders and 2022 we'll be spend much more. >> neil: what is the likelihood of these kids they will never see social security or see medicare or medicaid? >> the likelihood possibly they could, but what kind of money will it be paid out in? it will be monopoly money. the money that you would have to
medicare and social security without throwing granny over the cliff. gary, i talked to you because you tinker around the edges, you went broadside attacking these problems, beginning with social security and medicare, raising the retirement age to 70, all that, that is going to win your friends but your argument and organization's argument we have to do something now, right? >> if the government want to have a fiscal situation that can support the economy we have to address the growing expense of entitlements that constitutes more than 40% of government spending. there really isn't any alternative. >> neil: what happens when you hear leave entitlements alone and rely on revenues because there are a lot more revenues to be had with than spending cuts to be gained? >> i just can't understand that
argument. americans put these in place to support americans in the later stages of our lives. the good news the later stages of our lives now come later because we're living longer and healthier lives. why would we think that these programs should be left untouched when the very circumstances that gave rise to them in the first place have changed for the better? we ought to see it as an opportunity and not dwell on some unfortunate thing. >> neil: part of your thinking, when people hear -- oh, my gosh, gary and his group want to raise the retirement age to 70. you are not advocating, but people 55 and older are sticking by the same rules. the younger phased in with slightly later retirement years. that falls to deaf ears. >> i think it's unrealistic
character staying. we are suggesting 55 and older, see no different. if you are under 52, nothing change and 55 to 70 would not changed. it would be feathered in. >> neil: you and i similar age, could you not knock do tha down a little lower so i could be safe and not have to worry about this? >> i'm pretty sure that the $13,000 in real terms that you receive as social security recipient will not figure every so prominently in your retirement. for folks like us there is a lot we can do to make. >> neil: that seems to be a no. you bring up a very good point. this is long term thinking, this is long term adjustment. this is long term fine tuning but the organize even if you are trying to slow the growth of an
entitlements. in this case you are trying to keep it viable. you know, you are giving out to grandpa and grandma and that is not what you are doing. every time you try to address entitlements? >> it's demographic. we are proposing demographics graphic responses. we're suggestinging this problem has arisen because americans are living longer and better health and the government supporting a larger percentage of one's life. >> neil: what about more revenues. somebody in congress look we actually almost a third of the revenues we wanted in the latest cliff deal. let's have more revenues and the rich pay more. then we'll address some of these cuts or savings that gary alludes to? >> it's the wrong instrument. the economy is very weak.
we need to do whatever we can to support job creation. raising taxes more than was accomplished in the last few weeks on any category of americans is not a good solution to a problem that is fundamentally a demographic problem. >> neil: you don't argue that taxes should be part of it. you argue that we got the tax part of it. let's focus on the spending part of it, right? >> we can ratchet back people in higher income brackets receive once they become eligible. that addresses that issue. what we want to do is weak economy, the last thing we would do is just that. >> neil: just showing a direction at least more fiscally sound could pay rich dividends. not only the markets will jump
for joy but it would show our fiscal savvy? >> will is great concern in jobs like mine that the government has lost capacity to find solutions to relatively straightforward problems. the debate is polarized and largely dysfunctional. what you are suggesting and i agree with, any evidence that washington is capable to find sensible solutions to these issues, it would be encouraging to everyone. it would provide a greater level of competence and stability. >> neil: there is enough to offend everyone and also to challenge everyone which is the making of good idea. we'll talk later how you secured a deal that would benefit me, but that did not entertain you. we'll have time. gary, thanks very much. in the meantime, would any
of you leave this for this? nearly 60,000 people did and only john knows why. [ male announcer ] how can power conmption in china, impact wool exports from new zealand, textile production in spain, and the use of medical technology in the u.s.? at t. rowe price, we understand the connections of a complex, global economy. it's just one reason over 75% of our mutual funds beat their 10-year lipper average. twe price. invest with confidence. request a prospectus or summary prospectus with investment information, risks, fees and expenses to read and consider carefully before investing. >> announcer: meet jill. she thought she'd feel better after seeing her doctor. and she might have, if not for kari, the identity thief who stole jill's social security number to open credit cards, destroying jill's credit and her dream of retirement. now meet amanda.
with a swipe of her debit card, she bought some gas... and an all-expense-paid trip to hawaii for ben. ben is the identity thief who used a device called a skimmer to steal her information from her card to open a fraudulent account. every year millions of americans ju like you learn that a little personal information in the wrong hands could wreak havoc on your life. this is identity theft, and no one helps stop it better than lifelock. lifelock offers the most comprehensive identity theft protection available. ordinary credit monitoring services tell you after your identity has been stolen; they may take 30 days to alert you! too late for amanda. with lifelock's /7 proactive protection, jill would have been alerted as soon as they noticed an attack in their network, before it was too late. and lifelock's bank account takeover alerts would have notified amanda in time to help protect her money. lifelock guards your social security number, your money, your credit, even the equity
in your home. while identity theft can't be completely stopped, no one protects you better than lifelock. and lifelock stands behind that, with the power of their $1 million service guarantee. you have so much to protect, and nothing to lose when you call lifelock right now and try 60 days of identity theft protection risk-free. 60 days risk-free! use promo code: onguard. order now, and get this document shredder, a $29 value, free! call or go online now. [♪...] hi. i'm henry winkler. and i'm here to tell homeowners that are 62 and older about a great way to live a better retirement. it's called a reverse mortgage. [ male announcer ] call right now to receive your free dvd and booklet with no obligation. it answers questions like how a reverse mortgage works,
how much you qualify for, the ways to receive your money, and more. plus, when you call now, you'll get this magnifier with l.e.d. light absolutely free. when you call the experts at one reverse mortgage today, you'll learn the benefits of a government-insured reverse mortgage. it will eliminate your monthly mortgage payments and give you tax-free cash from the equity in your home. and here's the best part -- you still own your home. take control of your retirement today. ♪ ♪ >>. >> neil: big inauguration is days away and we'll cover it just like we were d four years
ago all right. i had my geography right. >> this whole process, is there any chance he wouldn't make some of it tonight. >> i don't think there is any chance of that. >> jimmy carter de-emphasized the inaugural balls. he wanted to identify with low key events and given the economic difficulties, but i believe he made all of them. this is massive number, a record number of inaugural balls, but don't worry, he'll get there. >> neil: and we'll get there, too. it all kicks off next monday on fox business, 11:30 eastern time and could go longer until 1:00
p.m. we pick up on fox news and then i come back at 8:00 p.m., by then i may have had a drink or two. you don't want to miss a minute of it. we're going to have a big debate at the time was at the time the balls he was going to make, i think it was two planned so he should make those two. and migration sensation, more people going from california to texas. >> it's showdown between two states, texas versus california. which is better place to live? california has better weather, but that is not going to solve san bernardino's problem. they tried to ask people at city hall what happened. >> is there anyone here. >> the job prospects are far better in texas. >> texas versus california, that is our show. >> neil: and texas won, john
stossel? >> not in every category. texas isn't so good at protecting your property. in texas more likely to seize your property. >> neil: what does texas do right that california did not? >> they don't regulate you to death. they have too many regulations but california passed a hundred new laws just last year. three a day and the taxes which means more money goes to the government. so there is more job growth and opportunity in texas, a million people -- in california they used to grow triple the rate of population growth than the rest of the country. it has stopped in 1990. last ten years, a million people left california, half a million moved into texas from other states. >> neil: the legislative session in texas is shorter.
>> i love this. the los angeles city council, they are paid $150,000 a year and they meet all the time. in texas, for the whole state, they only meet for 140 days every two years. >> neil: really, but there are more state workers in texas. >> that shocked me. more state workers but they pay them so much more in california, that is why california is going broke. it's not just the pay. and the pensions, you put up the number unfounded liability per government worker in california is more than $400,000. >> neil: they just promise them stuff. >> they don't have it and going broke. >> neil: i don't know if john will be able to go back to california after this special
but texas will be a good option. not raising the debt ceiling does not mean we default faulty. why does the president keep saying that? why does the media let him keep saying that? [ male announcer ] ok, here's the way the system works. let's say you pay your guy around 2% to manage your money. that's not much you think. except it's 2% every year. does that make a difference? search "cost of financial advisors" ouch. over time it really adds up. then go to e-trade and find out how much our advice costs.
>>. >> neil: spare no expense in graphics department. time for mainstream alerted. republicans are putting out that we are verge of defaulting. president-elect former senator from south carolina, jim demint. it's accepted as fact if we don't raise this thing we're all defaulting and the only way to do that is not need our bond obligations, right? >> neil, i think you know that is not through. federal government brings in
$230 billion every month, interest on our debt is about $19 billion. we can pay our interest, we can pay for social security and medicare and medicaid and our troops and still have some left over. certainly there will be things that you have to cut. this is point in time where americans need to decide that we don't want to be like greece. >> neil: i think it's worth repeating, you don't default unless you don't make payments to creditors and like you said, we would have more wiggle room do that and made good on our commitments to social security, medicare, medicaid, defense. tougher decisions about excess spending 40% over what we take in but the idea of default or become greece instantly is a lie? >> as the lie. the president and some others in congress are trying to say if we
don't spend what we plan to spend, then we defaulted in some way. you know that is not true. a lot of families cut on what they plan to do. we need to make some toughsions. president said if he got his tax increase he would cut spending. he needs to fulfill that promise, but this is an important time for us to decide that we're going to make those hard decisions and cut spending. you really got two choices. we can balance the budget this year by not raising the debt limit or we can do the democrats' ray way and never raise it at all. actually, you are going to hear conservatives present a third option and that is put us on a path to balance within ten years. we can do that without cutting anything from what americans are expecting. that is what we need to do. >> neil: what bothers me the most, senator, we go through elaborate hoops to avoid this thing, trillion dollar coin even
14th amendment and giving the president sole discretion and then address the underlying problems that keeps creating that. why do we do that? >> the problem is not the debt ceiling or debt limit the problem is the debt. the reason why we have a legal limit on the debt if we keep borrowing we're going to hurt everyone who lives there. i think the president is trying to scare people and distract from the main issue. he said he was going to cut the deficit his first year in office we doubled it every year. it's time to make hard decisions. there is ongoing wrong with suggesting over the next ten years, we stop borrowing from our children's future and we balance our budget. we can do that. i think most americans will agree. >> neil: you got to wonder, if the mainstream media that republicans are being obstructionists if they dare
reject raising the debt ceiling but they didn't do it to a single democrat seven years ago including senator barack obama, then republicans are damned no matter what they do? >> it's part of the strategy of this administration on fiscal cliff, on all kinds of issues is to frighten people, frighten seniors. we need to reassure seniors with their truth, their social security and medicare is going to get paid unless the president is completely irresponsible. interest on our debt is going to get paid and our credit rating is likely to stay where it is if we cut spending rather than blow through another debt limit without making the hard decisions. >> neil: thank you very much. good. good to see you. >> neil: meanwhile, pick up the tab for national health care and reduce the debt? that is what democrats are
proposing. adopting this so-called public option would actually cut the deficit. that had me thinking -- remember that one with chevy chase, and new shimmer and floor wax and it was dessert topping. i tell you, the same shim never, what do you make of that? >> it also grows hair, that is important to me. >> neil: another public option, giving the government total control reduces all these redundant costs and everything is done, everything is saved, spending problem goes away and that addresses what the president has told at the white house, we don't have a spending problem. it's because of this healthcare problem. >> i mean this is so riddled
with mistakes, it's hard to list them all. as you know and previous guest gary made clear, the problem is entitlement spending. if you add new entitlement, you have a bigger problem. it goes the wrong direction. insurance costs are high for two reasons. healthcare costs are high and insurance has to pay for operations on top of that and all obamacare did was add new regulations and insurance costs. it made the bill go up and not down and public optional will fix that. >> neil: inherent in the argument, what we mean to say, the public option and insurance companies go away, they don't exist. illegal all the government? >> absolutely. there are many people who believe this was from the beginning a plan to get rid of private insurance and turn it into one big government operation. we're seen some evidence of that. here is the problem, in the end what does the insurance company
do, it negotiates with other providers to get the lowest price they can so they can sell insurance. there was never a government that looks for the lowest price. this fundamentally is flawed as a health policy idea, it's not big enough to be interesting. if they really got it right, we believe everything they said, it would amount to one month's borrowing. we need real solutions and not this county. >> good seeing you. thanks very much. before we're done, my next guest suggests a lockdown.
but my next guest suggests a trap. >> a trained security guard pushes and active shooter along making security events and lobby doors and ostdz and other populated areas of the school are immediately locked down creating a man trap. and command center is alerted. >> if the bsa command center we have an active shooter at washington high school. >> former detective is the man behind that system. good idea but i think if a crazy guy is trapped in there and he has a weapon, that could be a problem. >> it could be a problem to the extent he could possibly shoot out the door but three things happen innings takenously. run and hide and kids are hiding. he is trapped. he can only go out shooting his way out and instantaneously we
are giving intelligence to the 911. so the police are coming. he is trapped like a rat stuck with magnetized doors, access control doors. we press a button. >> neil: what triggers that? >> three things, the guard touching the bottom on as you saw there. a bullet leaving the gun our sensors identify, not a firecracker, not a back firing truck but a bullet, three things. magnetize the doors, man trap him, run and hide. he can't get to where the kids are. this is simple stuff. he is trapped. could he shoot his way through the door but it will take time. kids are hiding and police are coming. every second matters. breaking glass. he breaks glass as you see on the tape. same thing, it magnetizes the doors and notifies 911. >> neil: what if there is no
guard and he walks into the school? >> we showed that. if there is no guard and he comes into school, two things have happened. our smart cameras put the equivalent put a invisible fence around the school at first bell. at 8:30, we have invisible fence around the school. anybody that comes five feet in school lights up red on our screen. these screens are being monitored. here comes a mom, i forgot to bring the kid lunch. she rings the intercom, his mrs. smith and she gives the bag. the bad guy can't press the intercome but we know he is five feet within the school. >> neil: a lot of schools don't have the interest come? >> but our cameras create that boundary. so once you cross five feet within the school, we are watching you. >> neil: so you want to slow him
down so he can't do bad stuff? >> to identify, slow down and man trap. we want to reduce the aggressive behavior and so he can't get to where the kids are. those doors are locked and we lock them instantly the second that any behavior that is criminal, aggressive a bullet comes out of that gun. we got him trapped. >> neil: not bad ideas here. we'll have a lot more including the latest on boeing next. [ male announcer ] it's simple physics...
a body at rest tends to stay at rest... while a body in motion tends to stay in motion. staying active can actually ease arthritis symptoms. but if you have arthritis, staying active can be difficult. prescription celebrex can help relieve arthritis pain so your body can stay in motion. because just one 200mg celebrex a day can provide 24 hour relief for many with arthritis pain and inflammation. plus, in clinical studies, celebrex is proven to improve daily physical function so moving is easier.
celebrex can be taken with or without food. and it's not a narcotic. you and your doctor should balance the benefits with the risks. all prescription nsaids, like celebrex, ibuprofen, naproxen and meloxicam have the same cardiovascular warning. they all may increase the chance of heart attack or stroke, which can lead to death. this chance increases if you have heart disease or risk factors such as high blood pressure or when nsaids are taken for long periods. nsaids, including celebrex, increase the chance of serious skin or allergic reactions or stomach and intestine problems, such as bleeding and ulcers, which can occur without warning and may cause death. patients also taking aspirin and the elderly are at increased risk for stomach bleeding and ulcers. do not take celebrex if you've had an asthma attack, hives, or other allergies to aspirin, nsaids or sulfonamides. get help right away if you have swelling of the face or throat, or trouble breathing. tell your doctor your medical history. and find an arthritis treatment for you. visit celebrex.com and ask your doctor about celebrex. for a body in motion.
nothing. are you stealing our daughter's school supplies and taking them to work? no, i was just looking for my stapler and my... this thing. i save money by using fedex ground and buy my own supplies. that's a great idea. i'm going to go... we got clients in today. [ male announcer ] save on ground shipping at fedex office. >> neil: on top of a fleet of dreamliners not flying. taking down boeing stock as well. shares of boeing falling 4.3% today. the airline flying in more trouble with the jumbo jet. dan springer has the latest. >> january has been a rough month for boeing, especially when you consider how high they were flying in december. they overtook air bus as the
world's number one plane maker for the first time in a decade. sales were soaring. now all we talk about is the dreamliner turned into a nightmare. the latest problem was in western japan, flight operated made an emergency landing after warning lights went on and electrical smoke was smellesmelled in the cockpit. it was a problem with the battery behind and below the pilot near the front of the plane. nobody was hurt but afterwards they apologized to the customers and grounded all 17 of the dreamliner. >> pan airlines followed suit with the seven planes. the national transportation safety board sent an investigator to japan. the ntsb you remember has its own investigation of a battery fire that happened on the ground in boston last week. that battery was in the back of the plane. used to provide power when the 787 is not flying. friday, the faa announced it was conducting comprehensive review of the dreamliner electrical system. united airlines released a statement today say